[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 98 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1583-E1584]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. PHIL GINGREY

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 24, 2009

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration of the bill (H.R. 2647) to 
     authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military 
     activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe 
     military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2010, and for 
     other purposes:

  Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chair, as we consider H.R. 2647, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, I would like 
to say a special thanks to Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon--
as well as to subcommittee Chairman Abercrombie and Ranking Member 
Bartlett--for their tireless efforts in support of our soldiers, 
sailors, airmen, and marines who are bravely defending us at home and 
abroad.
  While not a perfect bill, this legislation covers a wide scope of 
issues that are vitally important to our Armed Services, both active 
and reserve component, and it clearly addresses the most pressing needs 
of our troops in a very trying time for America. A 3.4% pay raise for 
all members of the Armed Forces will further reduce the military-
civilian pay disparity. I am very pleased with the work the Committee 
has done this year to authorize $368 million for the advance 
procurement of long-lead supplies needed to build 12 additional F-22's 
in 2011. The F-22 is the world's most capable fighter, and these funds 
will go a long way towards providing stability for our forces and 
ensuring that America maintains air dominance for the foreseeable 
future.
  While I applaud the work of the Committee in addressing pressing 
readiness issues, I am however concerned about the deep cuts to missile 
defense. A viable missile defense system is critical to deterring and 
countering emerging threats to our national security--especially as 
Iran and North Korea develop their nuclear capabilities. I look forward 
to working with Chairman Skelton, Ranking Member McKeon, and the rest 
of the Committee as this bill moves forward to address these program 
needs.
  While there is much to be proud of in this bill, I am disappointed 
that the Rules Committee failed to make any of my four amendments in 
order. These were commonsense amendments, Mr. Chair, that would make 
the Department of Defense (DoD) more effective in carrying out its 
mission.
  The first amendment I offered to this bill would have ensured that no 
detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility are transported to 
the United States. The American people have spoken on this issue with 
55% of them opposed to allowing terrorists to be transported to 
American soil. Further, a June 12, 2009 letter from the Director of the 
Federal Bureau of Prisons to my colleague, Trent Franks, stated that 
``there is insufficient bed space in any high-security Federal prison 
to

[[Page E1584]]

confine these individuals. In addition, there are currently no beds 
available in our Administrative Maximum United States Penitentiary in 
Florence, Colorado, to confine any more Federal inmates, let alone any 
of the Guantanamo Bay detainees. If called upon to confine any of these 
detainees, we would most likely confine them in ADX Florence and in one 
or more high-security penitentiaries. Depending on the numbers, this 
might require us to transfer a sufficient number of inmates to other 
penitentiaries in order to create the necessary bed space. Such 
transfers would impose significant additional challenges on our 
agency.'' Clearly the transfer of these detainees to anywhere in 
America is dangerous and must be prohibited.
  My second amendment would express the sense of Congress that active 
military personnel who live in or are stationed in Washington, DC, 
would be exempt from the District's firearms restrictions. On June 26, 
2008, the Supreme Court of the United States in the case, District of 
Columbia v. Heller, held that the Second Amendment protects an 
individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful 
purposes, and thus, ruled that the District of Columbia's handgun ban 
and requirements that rifles and shotguns in the home be kept unloaded 
and disassembled or outfitted with a trigger lock to be 
unconstitutional. However, the D.C. City Council has circumvented the 
Supreme Court ruling by enacting the Firearms Control Emergency 
Amendment Act of 2008, making a waiver necessary to ensure that our 
military men and women--of which there are 40,000 in Washington and who 
have been trained in firearm use--are permitted to safely carry a 
firearm in the District.
  A further amendment would prohibit DoD civilian employees from using 
official paid work time for union activities, ensuring that American 
taxpayers are not subsidizing labor organizations. DoD was one of the 
largest abusers of using ``official time'' for union activity. Its 
total number of official time hours in FY 2008 was 331,099 (a 5.1% 
increase from FY 2007). OPM estimated the official time wage cost for 
the DoD was $12,141,699 for FY 2008, which is an $855,694 increase from 
FY 2007. This is just one example of union activity being subsidized by 
taxpayer dollars on official time.
  My final amendment would have provided the Secretary of Defense with 
a waiver from section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act 
of 2007 regarding the procurement of alternative fuels if the Secretary 
feels that a waiver is appropriate to enhance the readiness of the 
Armed Forces. Section 526 prohibits all federal agencies from 
contracting for alternative fuels that emit higher levels of greenhouse 
gas emissions than ``conventional petroleum sources.'' DoD accounts for 
over 80% of all federal government fuel usage, and its annual fuel 
expense more than doubled between 2003 and 2007--from $5.2 billion to 
$12.6 billion. The Secretary of Defense needs a waiver from section 526 
so that DoD's fuel costs can be kept low.
  Mr. Chair, there is much to be proud of in this bill. I again commend 
Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member McKeon for their efforts to keep 
this bill focused on the needs of the war-fighter, a fact that I hope 
is not lost as we progress through the amendment process.

                          ____________________